Epigenome-Wide Tumor DNA Methylation Profiling Identifies Novel Prognostic Biomarkers of Metastatic-Lethal Progression in Men Diagnosed with Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Aside from Gleason sum, few factors accurately identify the subset of prostate cancer patients at high risk for metastatic progression. We hypothesized that epigenetic alterations could distinguish prostate tumors with life-threatening potential. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Epigenome-wide DNA methylation profiling was performed in surgically resected primary tumor tissues from a population-based (n = 430) and a replication (n = 80) cohort of prostate cancer patients followed prospectively for at least 5 years. Metastasis was confirmed by positive bone scan, MRI, CT, or biopsy, and death certificates confirmed cause of death. AUC, partial AUC (pAUC, 95% specificity), and P value criteria were used to select differentially methylated CpG sites that robustly stratify patients with metastatic-lethal from nonrecurrent tumors, and which were complementary to Gleason sum. RESULTS: Forty-two CpG biomarkers stratified patients with metastatic-lethal versus nonrecurrent prostate cancer in the discovery cohort, and eight of these CpGs replicated in the validation cohort based on a significant (P < 0.05) AUC (range, 0.66-0.75) or pAUC (range, 0.007-0.009). The biomarkers that improved discrimination of patients with metastatic-lethal prostate cancer include CpGs in five genes (ALKBH5, ATP11A, FHAD1, KLHL8, and PI15) and three intergenic regions. In the validation dataset, the AUC for Gleason sum alone (0.82) significantly increased with the addition of four individual CpGs (range, 0.86-0.89; all P <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Eight differentially methylated CpGs that distinguish patients with metastatic-lethal from nonrecurrent tumors were validated. These novel epigenetic biomarkers warrant further investigation as they may improve prognostic classification of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer and provide new insights on tumor aggressiveness. Clin Cancer Res; 23(1); 311-9. ©2016 AACR.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".